Yes, it's a nice one. Have occasionally recommended it myself in the past years.

I just wished he would finally, finally spend one or two hours on a text explaining the less obvious options and possibilities. Much can be found out by trial-and-error, but some things are anything but self-explanatory. These definitely should get some written treatment, finally, after this long time.

__________________"People who believe in free will, are the easiest to manipulate." - Yuvai Noah Harari

I just wished he would finally, finally spend one or two hours on a text explaining the less obvious options and possibilities. Much can be found out by trial-and-error, but some things are anything but self-explanatory. These definitely should get some written treatment, finally, after this long time.

Maybe he will put some effort to it now that you mention it. Veitikka, AFAIK,
is the man behind the game.

I just wished he would finally, finally spend one or two hours on a text explaining the less obvious options and possibilities. Much can be found out by trial-and-error, but some things are anything but self-explanatory. These definitely should get some written treatment, finally, after this long time.

I'll tell him to hurry up with the quick start guide

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dowly

Ps. @Veitikka Tervetuloa

Kiitos.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

I wonder if there are plans for BAOR and multiplayer?

Unfortunately no plans for multiplayer, but the map designer is working on the BAOR map and units. That map alone is modest 7410 square kilometers

A quick start guide of limited reach is not so much what is needed, players can find out the basic things quite fast. But there are quite some details and features that I find tougher to make sense of, or where I wonder if and how the game simulates them or not. The less self-explanatory things and hidden details must be explained, not the obvious ones!

__________________"People who believe in free will, are the easiest to manipulate." - Yuvai Noah Harari

Okay. Another detaiol that got my attention was how man missed shots there are. VERY many. Leopards-2A4s needing to fire a dozen rounds at a target in order to finally hit it, does not sound right. Also, the firing ranges did not exceed around 2000m. I wonder why they do not engage at greater ranges even when having an unobstructed LOS. While there may not be reason in always firing at a moving target 4 km away, firing ranges of 3 km and more should be implemented, especially at stationary targets.

And a tip for urban areas: I would implement a variable that make LOS interrupted once it pentrates two rows of houses deep, because right now the houses seem to be treated as individual objects, giving even dense cities with small streets and tight houselines with closes facades the look of a loosely assembled camping site. This makies any behaviour of units in cities absolutely unrealistic.

Keep on the work! You are already that far that things like these, and some others, mean a shorter travel before you than what already lies behind you!

__________________"People who believe in free will, are the easiest to manipulate." - Yuvai Noah Harari

Okay. Another detaiol that got my attention was how man missed shots there are. VERY many. Leopards-2A4s needing to fire a dozen rounds at a target in order to finally hit it, does not sound right. Also, the firing ranges did not exceed around 2000m. I wonder why they do not engage at greater ranges even when having an unobstructed LOS. While there may not be reason in always firing at a moving target 4 km away, firing ranges of 3 km and more should be implemented, especially at stationary targets.

Maybe so many shots were needed because you were firing at a dug-in or hull-down target with a small turret from a long range? The green arc indicates that the unit is hull-down. Leo2 shouldn't usually have problems hitting a target that's a few kilometers away. The APFSDS max range is set to 3500 meters, it's possible to engage targets that far away if the LOS is unobstructed. The LOS tool ignores all smoke, so the unit LOS can be obstructed even if the tool shows otherwise.

Quote:

And a tip for urban areas: I would implement a variable that make LOS interrupted once it pentrates two rows of houses deep, because right now the houses seem to be treated as individual objects, giving even dense cities with small streets and tight houselines with closes facades the look of a loosely assembled camping site. This makies any behaviour of units in cities absolutely unrealistic.

Yes indeed, it could be a good idea to restrict the LOS in urban areas...

Maybe so many shots were needed because you were firing at a dug-in or hull-down target with a small turret from a long range? The green arc indicates that the unit is hull-down. Leo2 shouldn't usually have problems hitting a target that's a few kilometers away. The APFSDS max range is set to 3500 meters, it's possible to engage targets that far away if the LOS is unobstructed. The LOS tool ignores all smoke, so the unit LOS can be obstructed even if the tool shows otherwise.

As I remember, it were scouts on the move in plain terrain or on roads, as well as some APCs or IFVs, sometimes sitting still on a road. Range below 2000. No smoke for the most.

Also, what irritated me, in the AAR it showed that of the Russian force in a meeting scenario where I (German forces) choosed to just sit still in hiding, half of the units were ZSU57 and air defence, while in the menu a unit composition of "armour" was selected. But even for a mechanised or infantry force, a composition where half of the combat units are AD, looks a bit weired and ineffective. The scenario rated it as a total victory for me after I had killed most of the APCs and IFVs, and the two or three tanks there were. Of the ZSU57 I did not shoot a single one. To see that long column of ZSU57 driving down on the road, maybe a dozen of them , was strange, even more so since they obviously were not handled as to their value and purpose, but where handled like tanks with marching order.

The automatic unit composition in the menu maybe better is to be ignored? I choosed "armour" for my force composition, too, what I got was 4 Leopards, 12 Fuchs and a handful of infantry scouts. That is a light, a very olight mechnaised force. "Armour" would mean tank-heavy forces. And that'S what I planned to get when switching both force compsoitions to armour and automatic: a tank battle. Of the maybe two dozen Russian vehiuclkes, half were AD, 3 were T64, the rest were very light APCs on scouting missions - not even BMPs (like there also were no Marders on German side).

Don'T want to annoy you, veitikka, but since you create this game, I simply assume you look for feedback even if it raising questions. I don't want to complain, but mean it in a constructive way. With the general design you are in for something, I think, it reminds me a bit of playing SBP-PE from a map view exclusively, with a lighter focus on realism. With the basic structure apparently established, what it now needs is plenty of polish and finetuning.

Which admittedly is likely to be the trickier part. I see that in your home forum Lieste makes appearances - that is good advise coming from him.

I would also invite interested players in the eSim forum by going there and telling them what you do, as long as you do not commercially rival them, which I assume is no problem as long as your game is free. Explain your project, and invite them to go over and have a look, I think the management then will not object. You would dig for a treasurechest of experience and knowledge there if some of the old hands there decide to give it a try. But to have a few pages of how-to-handle-the-game instructions I would consider to be a must, first.

__________________"People who believe in free will, are the easiest to manipulate." - Yuvai Noah Harari

The automatic unit composition in the menu maybe better is to be ignored? I choosed "armour" for my force composition, too, what I got was 4 Leopards, 12 Fuchs and a handful of infantry scouts. That is a light, a very olight mechnaised force. "Armour" would mean tank-heavy forces. And that'S what I planned to get when switching both force compsoitions to armour and automatic: a tank battle. Of the maybe two dozen Russian vehiuclkes, half were AD, 3 were T64, the rest were very light APCs on scouting missions - not even BMPs (like there also were no Marders on German side).

The units have a purchase value, that is mostly based on their effectiveness. Sometimes the AutoPurchaser can give you a few "expensive" tanks, instead of a horde of "cheap" ones. Also, it tries to spend all of the purchase points it has, so it can spend the last points for something cheap, like the ZSU-57s. You can adjust how much points can be spent for different categories in the "Combat power allocation" screen before the purchase phase. If you want a realistic force composition I recommend that you pick all units manually.

Artillery and CAS are in the game already. Artillery is purchased by using the +/- buttons. In the setup phase you have to designate the artillery target reference points and helicopter battle positions, and build the obstacles. If you haven't done everything the game enters the proper mode automatically, and basically you just have to start clicking on the map (or select the helicopter flight if the menu is opened).

On-map indirect fire (mortars and such) is controlled in the right-click menu. Select "IF", or use the keyboard shortcuts found in the help screen (press F1).